E2 Mini PC Ryzen 5 3550H(Max 3.7GHz) Dual Channel DDR4 Mini Computers, 16GB RAM 512GB NVMe SSD, Dual HDMI, 4X USB Ports, 1x RJ45 Ethernet Ports, Wi-Fi 5, BT5.0

The media could not be loaded. Bosgame M2 (Ryzen 9 7940HS) vs Geekom GT1 (Core Ultra 9 185H)In this review, I will compare the Bosgame BeyondMax M2 with the Geekom GT1. I had been a fan of Beelink's GT-R models as some of my favorite mini computers, but unfortunately I did not have the budget to try out their GTi14 for this review. Instead, I borrowed my coworker's Geekom GT1 that houses the same CPU (computer brain) as the GTi14. Performance comparisons should be very similar between the GT1 and GTi14.WHY THE BOSGAME M2?Mini PCs have come a VERY long way since my very first one, the Beelink U57. The U57 was our first budget computer small enough to use for video conferencing and distance learning on our Samsung TV. It had afforded excellent performance with a 2015 chip, storage options, low power consumption, and great value in a compact size. It also ran Windows Server 2016 well so I could remotely do some work while the kids were simultaneously chatting away with the grandparents.As speedy as the U57 was for casual use, however, its maximum of 8GB of memory succumbed to my need to run some heavy security tests for work. The Beelink GT-R series with more expansion options solved the issue. However, over the past two or so years, I have noticed a shift in Mini PCs: they have increasingly become more gaming capable. I do not mean casual games, but blockbuster titles like Call of Duty, X-Plane, Microsoft Flight Simulator, and so on. Those games had failed miserably with the built-in graphics processing units (GPU) found in older Mini PCs.Imagine my excitement to see Bosgame, whose eGPU (external GPU) I had already loved, offer a Mini PC option with gaming capabilities! But, take this with a small disclaimer: absent of hooking up an external, dedicated graphics card, I did not expect the Bosgame M2 to perform as well. I had to be realistic there with my expectations.Let's dive into it.IN A NUTSHELLBosgame is a relatively new brand I had only been introduced to recently after watching and reading rave recommendations for its eGPU (external graphics card). I fell in love with their eGPU and was curious to see how their mini PCs would fare -- particularly, one with a gaming graphics card built in. The Ryzen 9 7940HS CPU (computer brain) and associated Radeon 780M GPU the Bosgame M2 came with had excellent specifications.Externally, the M2 looked like many of the generic mini PCs: gray, minimalistic, buttons at the front and back, and cooling vents on the sides, top, and bottom. What stood out, however, was the top of the chassis that looked like a face with two "eyes" under the "eyebrows". Closer inspection found two speakers right behind those "eyes". I confirmed this after taking the computer apart to upgrade both the SSD storage and memory.Internally, the M2 was easy to take apart: removed 4 screws along the bottom of the chassis, took out a metal shield that had a replaceable fan affixed, and right underneath were two slots each -- a pair for SODIMM memory and another for M.2 SSD drives. Underneath one of them was an Intel AX210 NGW WiFi 6E module.More importantly, how did the CPU and GPU -- the computing and graphics brains -- perform? I had pit the similarly-priced Bosgame M2's AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS against the Geekom GT1's Intel Core Ultra 9 185H CPU, and found the AMD having a very narrow advantage overall. For pure speed, the Intel was about 11% faster, but the AMD had a slight 6% overclocking advantage. Intel's processor also had a much higher market share despite being a newer processor, and you can thank Intel's industry dominance for that marketing and penetration advantage.Both chips included AI components for increased AI task acceleration.Nonetheless, in terms of pure processing speed, the Intel chip was a slightly better recommendation with its higher CPU core count. What that means is faster word processing, multitasking, and loading times. However, when you start to compare the gaming performance of the GPUs the two chips provide, the story turned around... slightly.The Intel Core CPU came with the Intel Arc Xe 128EU, whereas the AMD Ryzen included the AMD Radeon 780M. The latter, AMD, outperformed the Intel SLIGHTLY in overall gaming benchmarks. So, in the end, either chip was suitable for gaming.Both the Bosgame and the Geekom performed well with gaming and everyday tasks. Ultimately, I chose to go with the Bosgame because for some reason, the Geekom's USB-C/Thunderbolt 4 port did not work with the eGPU I had connected. I thought it might have been a driver issue, but that was not the case. Additionally, the Bosgame had built-in speakers, making it more portable to carry around. Do not expect high-fidelity sound to come from those speakers, though, but they were sufficiently loud enough for a quick game of Call of Duty or one of my favorite classic: Command & Conquer Red Alert.Both ran X-Plane 12 acceptably with 30 FPS with medium setting. By contrast, the Bosgame eGPU ran at much higher resolution with all settings maxed out and at about 70 FPS. Not too bad for a mini computer and its built-in graphics card!I also had installed Ubuntu Linux flawlessly with minimal configuration.CPU: INTEL VS AMDThe CPU, the "brain" of a computer, is an important piece to gauge performance. It is responsible for processing all the general calculations and instructions to carry out everything an electronic device can do. The faster it can "think", the faster things will get done.Intel has maintained a significant lead in the computer industry with only AMD having been its noteworthy rival for decades. The announcement of the "Ryzen" brand in 2017 marked AMD's return to high-performance computing with integrated graphics processing ("Radeon Vega" GPU), helping the company to steadily regain market share from stagnant Intel. AMD's Ryzen processors offer greater, multi-threaded performance than Intel at the same price-point and has gained popularity with budget-conscious gamers.AMD RYZEN 9The Bosgame M2's AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS is positioned against Intel's high-range, mainstream Core i9 processor. "Ryzen" numbering scheme mirrors Intel's "Core": the 3, 5, 7, 9, and "Threadripper" models go from lowest to highest performance.TIPSSTORAGE AND EXPANSIONINSTALLATION/UPGRADE: SATA/M.2 SSD/MEMORYReplacing the 2.5" SATA drive, adding an additional M.2 SSD, or replacing/adding extra RAM are hassle-free. Pop off the 4 screws found at the bottom of the case to reveal the storage/memory slots. Be sure to educate yourself about which parts to buy, as I will explain below.DRIVE DIFFERENCES: SATA, SSD, mSATA, M.2, NVMeHard disk drives (HDD) are mechanical devices whose performance was primarily based on the RPM (revolutions per minute) rating. They were generally 5400 or 7200 RPM (and beyond) — the higher the number, the faster it would usually perform. As with anything mechanical, they break down over time as the components age.Flash-memory based Solid State Drives (SSD) were introduced in the 1990s and were VERY expensive. SSD promised resistance to physical shock, faster performance, lower heat output, and more silent operation. Even to this day, SSDs still cost more than similarly-sized HDDs.SSD and HDD connect to your computer via multiple interfaces. Relative to this Mini PC, we are only concerned with the SATA and PCIe ones. SATA can connect two drive types:- 2.5" SATA SSD (nowadays used in most laptops and desktop PCs and is physically larger)- mSATA and M.2 SSD (typically used in Mini PCs and laptops), each with their own connection typesMini-SATA (mSATA) is older and slower than M.2, and the latter can also connect to the newer, significantly faster PCIe interface (those drives are known as NVMe M.2 SSD).- This Mini PC includes two M.2 SSD 2280 slots (NVMe)M.2 SSD 2230, 2242, 2260, 2280? WHAT DO THEY MEAN?- The first two digits correspond to the width of the drive- The last two are the lengthA M.2 SSD 2280 is 22mm wide and 80mm long. This is important to know, especially with Mini PCs where space is scarce. If you purchase a 2280 drive and the computer only has room for 2230, you would not be able to use the former.FINAL THOUGHTSBoth the Bosgame M2 and the Geekom GT1 are premium-looking Mini PCs with some forward-thinking technologies, thoughtful design, and generous expansion options that can challenge mainstream laptops and desktop computers. Performance was among the best for Mini PCs in their class and price range with the ability to run as demanding tasks as video and photo editing with decent gaming to boot. The Bosgame can be VESA mounted behind a monitor/TV or simply be thrown inside a well-ventilated drawer. Likewise, both of their compact size makes them suitable as a travel companion that can be neatly tucked away in a RV or camper van.Only the Bosgame came with built-in speakers that were suitably loud enough for a quick game while traveling, and it cost a little less than the Geekom, making it a slightly better recommendation for me.

I bought this to replace an aging (and venerable) NUC 7 to run my observatory which requires telescope control, dome rotation, basic/initial data stacking and plate solving. IYKYK. I required this to run on 12V. At least when I bought this, this was not specified to run on 12V on Amazon, though Bosgame's website indicates it runs on 12-20V. For my fellow astronomers out there, this is true.Background: I replaced the 512GB SSD with a 2TB SSD (Silicon Power 2TB NVMe M.2), upgraded to 32GB RAM (Timetec 32GB KIT(2x16GB) DDR4 2400MHz), and replaced the WiFi card with an Intel AX210. None of this was necessary, and this unit was still cheaper than any alternative I found with a processor at this performance level. The Wifi module upgrade was $26 and installed in 4 minutes. The RAM and SSD upgrades were easy for someone who can barely use a screwdriver and knows little about computers. Note: there is only one slot for the SSD. Opening this up showed decent quality control and an easy layout to work with.Power consumption: A stress test with N.I.N.A image capture, PHD2 guiding, Cartes du Ciel, Gemini mount control, ASCOM Hub (for dome control), and, just to make it interesting, SIRIL (astronomy image processing program) stacking 450 subexposures peaked at 37 watts before settling down to 25-26 watts with BIOS settings unchanged from factory settings ("Balanced performance"). Under "normal" conditions, meaning capturing images; controling the dome and mount and cameras; and PHD2 guiding running, this hummed along between 15-21 watts, so less than 2 amps. This is slightly less than my NUC7 with an i5-7260U processor, but this AMD 3550H processor has twice as many cores and threads. The speed improvement over my old processor was significant and immediately noticeable. This will also run laps around Intel N100-N300 processors while allowing for dual-channel RAM.WiFi - Astronomers will know why I automatically upgraded the WiFi module before even turning the computer on. For most users, the standard WiFi module will be more than good enough, but I'm running this 65 feet from my house. The computer is inside a fiberglass observatory. With the upgraded module, download speeds were around 240-260 Mbps in perfect conditions in the observatory with the computer away from the metal telescope pier and without an USB Wifi antenna. With the computer attached to a steel pier, the signal dropped (very expectedly) down to a respectable 35-70 Mbps download (enough for Windows Remote Desktop). As planned, I use this with a relatively cheap TP-Link USB wifi antenna away from the telescope pier. Wifi speeds in this configuration range between 150 to 220 Mbps download. The connection is quite stable and still plenty fast over Windows Remote Desktop. For comparison, inside my house, download speeds were over 600 Mbps, so the physics of walls and distance still apply. In my use so far, I have not had any latency issues controlling this from inside my home (with the computer outside in the observatory) using Windows Remote Desktop in a suburban neighborhood with quite a number of Wifi networks visibile (houses are close together). The connection does not drop.I ran a CrystalDiskMark Read/Write Test with the somewhat generic SSD I bought to replace this was a respectable ~2800MB/s write and a RNK4K speed of ~280MB/s. It is no speed demon, but this was both better than I expected and more than good enough for astronomy.In indoor and outdoor testing, I've only ever heard the fan turn on at initial startup. Even while "stress testing," I never heard the fan turn on during normal use. This thing was cool to the touch indoors and outdoors. I did check temps via HWmonitor a couple of times and never saw temperatures approach 50C. Heavy gamers might have a different experience here. It should be noted that astronomy programs intended to run telescopes and observatories do not tax processors and memory like modern games do, so gamers' mileage may vary. However, image stacking and processing programs can tax processors and memory a little and the fan never turned on and power consumption remained below 40 watts in my limited use.Cons:1. The plastic quality is somewhat to be desired. I'm nitpicking hard here as that same plastic allows for more effective WiFi range than my NUC had, which was a metal Faraday cage of otherwise beautiful build quality. I'd rate the build quality as good enough, particularly at this price.2. No SATA expansion slot: Hence the reason why I got a 2TB SSD. I knew this going in, and now you do. I will not take a star off of my rating for this because they do not advertise this as having the capability to add a second SSD/SATA drive.3. This is advertised as only being able to use 2400Mhz DDR4 memory, but the module inside the unit was 2666Mhz DDR4. I don't know whether this was faster memory operating at 2400Mhz or whether the motherboard/processor can handle faster memory, but I had bought new memory sticks for this computer before I knew I could potentially squeeze out a little more speed with 2666Mhz DDR4. It is difficult to call this a con because I don't know the actual limitations of the computer. For most users, this underpromise and overdelivery might be a good thing. If expecting to upgrade from 16GB RAM immediately, check with BOSGAME first to ensure it can only operate with 2400Mhz.Overall, in the two weeks I've had this, I've been happy with its performance for astronomy. It has significantly better performance than an ASIAir and uses marginally more power than otherwise lower-performing N97, N100-N305 Intel processors. 1-1.5A under normal loads is extremely reasonable either in the field or in an observatory. This thing is a steal thus far.